Ian O'Doherty: Why let a whale die with dignity, but not a person?

Galvasean

The topic of euthanasia and morality in atheist/theist doctors came up here recently. I read a piece on the right to die in yesterday's Indo by Ian O' Doherty.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/ian-odoherty/ian-odoherty-why-let-a-whale-die-with-dignity-but-not-a-person-2322888.html

I find myself in agreement with the article (heck, I made a very similar, albeit less researched, point in a recent thread).

Thought it might be good food for thought. Opinions?

Mickeroo

He's dead right.

Turtwig

Interesting read thanks. I agree with him, but unfortunately I don't see the attitude to euthanasia changing any time soon.:(

liamw

Mickeroo wrote: »

He's dead right.

I see what you did there

The Mad Hatter

Ian O'Doherty makes some very good points, but he's not a very good writer...

Here's an interview with Terry Pratchett, in which he touches on the same subject, from Wednesday's Guardian.

"I feel embarrassed that people from this country have to go, cap in hand, to die in Switzerland. Apart from anything else, it makes it a rich man's – or a soon to be much poorer man's – possibility." And people have to go earlier than they intended. "Exactly."

He has a lot of time for the law in Oregon, where doctors can give a terminally ill patient a "potion to take when life gets too bad. I believe something like 40% or more of the patients die without taking it. Which means that every day they're thinking, 'Hmmmm – today's worth living.' And then one day they don't, and they die. That seems to me a very human thing, and a very good thing, because they can think, 'OK, that's sorted, I've got the potion, now I can get on and try and get the most out of life.'"

amacachi

We are a society that is terrified of death, but have yet to evolve to a point where we can have a mature discussion about it.

Gotta agree with that, though there's a great many things the same statement could be about.

A childhood friend of my dad's died recently from brain cancer, did all the fighting and got the all-clear before it came back and the usual, and more than one guy at the wake said to my dad that after seeing what he went through they wouldn't end up in a coffin weighing 5 stone like he did, there'd be a shotgun used. I just find it sad that what they're saying is actually logical because there's no medical option allowed.

mehfesto

If we have no control over nothing else, we should have control over our own lives. If we are incapacitated we should be allowed help.

I worked in an old folks home for years. There was a man in one of the rooms who every day would cry out 'let me die!'. It was hard to listen to.

When I asked the nurses why they force fed him and sneaked tablets into his food (ground up - yes, it happens) they said he was not thinking straight and needed help. He was fully corpus mentis as per his last 6-monthly psych review. I can't see how they were helping

He would pull out all his lines in him and smash items to harm himself with. So he was restrained. When I asked if it was ethical I was told that 'they were only doing what was best for him".

How keeping a man alive who hated his existence - trapped in a small room with no family or friends alive, with the same routine day in, day out with no contact with the outside world - accounts as 'the best for him' is beyond me.

I left nursing soon after.

This is rife throughout the Irish Care For The Elderly system. I can understand protecting those who have clinical medical issues, but this disgusted me. Keeping people alive out of some retarded duty.

ShooterSF

Maybe a poll would be nice. To see if many are actually against euthanasia and if there is much distinction between our religious visitors and ourselves..

amacachi

mehfesto wrote: »

If we have no control over nothing else, we should have control over our own lives. If we are incapacitated we should be allowed help.

I worked in an old folks home for years. There was a man in one of the rooms who every day would cry out 'let me die!'. It was hard to listen to.

When I asked the nurses why they force fed him and sneaked tablets into his food (ground up - yes, it happens) they said he was not thinking straight and needed help. He was fully corpus mentis as per his last 6-monthly psych review. I can't see how they were helping

He would pull out all his lines in him and smash items to harm himself with. So he was restrained. When I asked if it was ethical I was told that 'they were only doing what was best for him".

How keeping a man alive who hated his existence - trapped in a small room with no family or friends alive, with the same routine day in, day out with no contact with the outside world - accounts as 'the best for him' is beyond me.

I left nursing soon after.

This is rife throughout the Irish Care For The Elderly system. I can understand protecting those who have clinical medical issues, but this disgusted me. Keeping people alive out of some retarded duty.

I obviously couldn't comment without knowing more about that particular case but it sounds like they weren't putting too much effort into his medication if they were dosing him up and he was still doing all that.

mehfesto

amacachi wrote: »

I obviously couldn't comment without knowing more about that particular case but it sounds like they weren't putting too much effort into his medication if they were dosing him up and he was still doing all that.

Surely that's not the point, though!

He was in his eighties. He deserves not to be on medication unless absolutely necessary. Keeping him quiet and subdued isn't a necessity. If he doesn't want to be alive - and he has good reason not to want to - that's his choice, if he is in full mental capacity.

He was only there because he was old and had no family. There is a massive difference between elderly and senile.

amacachi

mehfesto wrote: »

Surely that's not the point, though!

He was in his eighties. He deserves not to be on medication unless absolutely necessary. Keeping him quiet and subdued isn't a necessity. If he doesn't want to be alive - and he has good reason not to want to - that's his choice, if he is in full mental capacity.

He was only there because he was old and had no family. There is a massive difference between elderly and senile.

I wasn't talking just about sedating him, but the fact that they're obviously not even giving proper medication for that purpose, let alone for depression or pain relief, let alone having a psychiatrist try to help him.

strobe

mehfesto wrote: »

If we have no control over nothing else, we should have control over our own lives. If we are incapacitated we should be allowed help.

I worked in an old folks home for years. There was a man in one of the rooms who every day would cry out 'let me die!'. It was hard to listen to.

When I asked the nurses why they force fed him and sneaked tablets into his food (ground up - yes, it happens) they said he was not thinking straight and needed help. He was fully corpus mentis as per his last 6-monthly psych review. I can't see how they were helping

He would pull out all his lines in him and smash items to harm himself with. So he was restrained. When I asked if it was ethical I was told that 'they were only doing what was best for him".

How keeping a man alive who hated his existence - trapped in a small room with no family or friends alive, with the same routine day in, day out with no contact with the outside world - accounts as 'the best for him' is beyond me.

I left nursing soon after.

This is rife throughout the Irish Care For The Elderly system. I can understand protecting those who have clinical medical issues, but this disgusted me. Keeping people alive out of some retarded duty.

Really good post man, but fukk that is awful. If I didn't know better I would think you lifted it from a scene in a particuarly dark Orwell novel.

Stercus Accidit

On the anecdote above, on what planet is it allright to "sneak" medication into someone?

An 80 year old is less of an adult than an 18 year old in our society its seems, where medicine is administered by force or deception.

The sad thing is how engrained in our culture it is that euthanasia is bad and artificial, superficial life is good.

timespast

It's a touchy subject....... I have been told that if patients are in terrible pain then relief is given....... large amounts of morphine etc. that renders them unconscious which ultimately speeds their demise.

I'm not a medical person but my wife has worked in Nursing homes and I believe in all cases death has been relatively peaceful.

If someone wants their life ended before a disease really sets in then suicide isn't illegal.

What Im trying to say is...... if laws are written in then it's open to interpretation in court and I think that can be a dangerous thing.

I'm not against Euthanasia in principle......Im just a tad worried about the legal aspect of it.

For example would this ultimately lead to medical staff making decisions for the patient who has no family?

mehfesto

mehfesto wrote: »

When I asked the nurses why they force fed him and sneaked tablets into his food (ground up - yes, it happens) they said he was not thinking straight and needed help. He was fully corpus mentis as per his last 6-monthly psych review. I can't see how they were helping
.

timespast wrote: »

For example would this ultimately lead to medical staff making decisions for the patient who has no family?

You mean like those guys?

Darlughda

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Ian O'Doherty makes some very good points, but he's not a very good writer...

Now that is being unnecessarily kind.

bnt

I heard about that whale: I don't know if "dignity" is the right word to describe how it was euthanised. It went out with a bang, but at least it didn't suffer any more.

I'm generally pro-euthanasia, though I understand why it has to be handled with extreme care. I just think that, since we are going to die at some time - no exceptions - we have the right to choose the time and method of our departure. We use our knowledge and wisdom to plan for every other situation we may encounter, it's part of what makes us human: why should we not plan for the final situation?

timespast

bnt wrote: »

I heard about that whale: I don't know if "dignity" is the right word to describe how it was euthanised. It went out with a bang, but at least it didn't suffer any more.

I'm generally pro-euthanasia, though I understand why it has to be handled with extreme care. I just think that, since we are going to die at some time - no exceptions - we have the right to choose the time and method of our departure. We use our knowledge and wisdom to plan for every other situation we may encounter, it's part of what makes us human: why should we not plan for the final situation?

My jaw dropped when I read the last two words as the "final solution"

bnt

timespast wrote: »

My jaw dropped when I read the last two words as the "final solution"

Yah, no, you don't want to do that. :eek: Way to kill a discussion ...

The Mad Hatter

This is the first time I've seen a thread Godwinned by accident.